Heresies of Westcott & Hort – Free download as PDF File .pdf), Text File .txt) or read online for free. Brooke Foss Westcott () John Anthony Hort () On the other side, their opponents have leveled charges of heresy, infidelity, apostasy, and. Meet the men whose disbelief compelled them to change the Bible – Wescott and Hort. See the heresy in their own words, and why they were determined to.

Author: Voodootaxe Arashikus
Country: Uzbekistan
Language: English (Spanish)
Genre: Art
Published (Last): 19 October 2014
Pages: 410
PDF File Size: 16.9 Mb
ePub File Size: 15.92 Mb
ISBN: 185-1-31959-929-2
Downloads: 43989
Price: Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]
Uploader: Yoll

Return to the Main Menu. This paper was not intended for use as a reference book.

Westcott and Hort

The Chapter Headings were not in the original essay. They have been added to make finding things easier. Because of the enormous influence of the theories of Drs. These two Cambridge scholars rose up, ostensibly to defend the faith from the attacks wstcott destructive critics in the mid 19th century. The English people secure in their trust that these men would take care of attacks on the Scripture; unknowingly accepted the public utterances, and writings of men who boasted between themselves that they held doctrine that would be considered dangerous heresy.

Even the Bible Societies, in a frantic effort to disassociate themselves with the increasingly discredited theories and Greek text of Westcott and Hort, cannot avoid the baneful influence of their horg. These two manuscripts were used to greatly undermine the authority of the great Greek Text, the Textus Receptus, which underlies the Authorized version KJV. This Greek text reliably represents the vast majority of all Greek manuscripts.

This Satanically inspired despising of the Textus Receptus and the Authorized Version of the Bible has been transmitted by means which Dr.

This brochure is an effort to demonstrate that Drs. The writer contends that their personal correspondence reveals doctrines that are blasphemous in regard to the atonement, and to humanity.

Finally, this is to demonstrate that in exalting the exceedingly strange manuscripts Vaticanus and Sinaiticus over the Textus Receptus, Dr. Hort was more terribly wrong than he was in his desire to see the American Nation shivered to pieces, and in his blasphemy against the Negro people. They furnished the death blow to the Textus Receptus.

Nowhere in all literature can we find a more perfectly clear self revelation of the man than in the Life and Letters of Fenton John Anthony Hortpublished in by his son, Arthur Fenton Hort. In his preface to this remarkable publication, Hort Jr. When we consider the drastic nature of the changes made to the text of the King James Version of the Scriptures by the Westcott and Hort teams of Revisers in ; and the deep theological teaching that is involved, it is not too much to say that this revelation should have been done many years ago.

In other words this paper is far past due. The Bible gives ample support for this conclusion. The multitudes who have so ardently followed the theories of Dr. Hort may be more than a little concerned as his letters speak for themselves concerning his doctrine, manner of life, and purpose. He dethroned the Textus Receptus. In order to accomplish this design, Dr. Hort enthroned two ancient documents, or manuscripts, Vaticanus and Sinaiticus.

These he used as the basis of his attack on the Textus Receptus. Westcott and Hort and others who follow in their train, felt that because these two Mss. That there is something clearly erroneous in this line of thinking is beautifully illustrated by Herman Hoskier, in his monumental work, “Codex B.

On page 1, volume 2, he states that there are differences between the readings of Vaticanus Codex B and Sinaiticus Alephin the Gospels alone. Hoskier then proceeds to set the differences forth in a masterly piece of scholarship. When we consider that the vast majority of modern versions of the Bible are based essentially upon these two ancient manuscripts, which are still used as witnesses against the text of the King James Version, it could be slightly disconcerting to some to remember that the Bible plainly tells us that witnesses which do not agree with each other are not witnessing truth.


At any rate these manuscripts which possibly differ seven thousand times in the New Testament are guilty of deceiving those who trust in them. If indeed it were as Hort supposed that being nearer to the original writings these were more accurate, then the most elementary scholarship would rightly expect to find the two Mss.

Instead of this we find them so often at variance with each other, that the scholar who trusts their testimony must be quite bewildered. A strange mental adjustment must be made on the part of those who follow Dr. Hort in his theories here. Westcott and Hort relied for success upon the enthroning of Vaticanus B in order to dethrone the Textus Receptus.

The scholarly Hoskier commences his preface to Vol. Hort is now being abandoned by many who once followed him in this; but those same scholars are exceedingly reluctant in many cases, to concede that every one of Dr. We shall now proceed to examine some of the basic reasons which contributed to the great delusion which blinded the mind of this famous scholar. We shall not have far to look as we examine his revealing letters.

Her religious feelings were deep and strong. Circumstances had made her an adherent of the Evangelical school, and she was to a certain degree hampered by it; the Oxford movement filled her with dread and anxiety as to its possible effect on her son. She studied and knew her Bible well, and her own religious life was most carefully regulated.

She recognized the fact that her son had departed from the faith once delivered to the saints, and was saddened thereby.

The Thinking, Theories and Theology of Drs. Westcott and Hort

Hort was an apostate. Let us now consider from is own admission the teachings for which he exchanged the glorious doctrines of Holy Scripture. Here are some of the fables which were received as if they were truth when Dr.

But is it not much accounted for, on the evil side, by the natural revertence of the religious instinct to idolatry and creature worship and aversion to the Most High; and, ON THE GOOD SIDE, by a right reaction from the inhuman and semi-diabolical character with which God is invested in all modern orthodoxies-Zeus and Prometheus over again?

In Romish countries the Virgin is a nearer and more attractive object, not rejected by the dominant creed; and the Divine Son retires into a distant cloud world with the Father, Another idea has lately occurred to me: Perhaps the whole question may be said to be involved in the true idea of mediation, which is almost universally corrupted in one or both of two opposite directions.

On the one hand we speak and think as if there were no real bringing near, such as the NT tells of, but only an interposition between two permanently distant objects. That admission is a masterpiece of understatement. The depths of his repudiation of the truth is indicated by his scathing reference to the subject, when he suggest that Mariolatry may be accounted for. The Zeus and Prometheus reference concerns Greek mythology. Zeus had ordained that humans should do without fire for cooking meat in order that man should be forced to eat raw flesh.

Prometheus stole fire from Mount Olympus and brought it down to man. Zeus swore vengeance on Prometheus and had him chained naked to a pillar in the Caucasus Mountains.

Each day a vulture appeared and feasted on his liver which was restored every night. After enduring this agony for years Prometheus was released by Hercules with the consent of Zeus. Thus Prometheus becomes the great friend of man, who suffers for his love of man by being punished by the great god, Zeus. In another essay he makes Zeus advance from such cruelty to wisdom. When Hort says that all modern orthodoxies invest out God with a semi-diabolical character he simply reveals the tremendous influence of the world of the occult in his own thinking.

The lie is given to these errors in 1Tim 2: Discussion of these two books fills a large part of his letters for some months, and on the subjects of both he burned to speak openly. Whatever may be thought of it, it is a book that one is proud to be contemporary with. I must work out and examine the argument more in detail, but at present my feeling is strong that the theory is unanswerable.


But I do see immense difficulties in his theory, some of which might by this time have been removed, if he had understood more clearly the conditions of his problem. But is seems to me the most probable manner of development, and the reflexions suggested by his book drove me to the conclusion that some kind of development must be supposed. The careful observer will note that Dr. If you want to see more doctrinal error conerning Baptism and more on the atonment: Let us at this point keep in mind the words of Paul to Timothy: I have, I trust a firm and assured belief in the reality of revelation, the authority of scriptures, the uniqueness and supremacy of the gospels Maurice has been a dear friend of mine for twenty three years, and I have been deeply influenced by his books If there be any difference, it concerns only the relation of the Atonement to other doctrines Christian peace comes not from sin denied, or sin ignored, but sin washed away.

If it was not washed effectually away once for all upon the cross, an awakened conscience has no refuge but in futile self efforts after a heathenish self-atonement.

Page 7 for an illustration of erroneous thinking that completely negates the value of this apparent orthodoxy. About the matter of the Atonement, we must all feel that it lies in a region into which we can have only glimpses It is the vain attempt to bring the Divine Truth down to the level of our own understanding, that has created all the dark perversions of the Atonement which have justly offended sensitive consciences, and so given to the denial of the truth itself.

Let us keep in mind the fact that Hort considered the idea of substitionary suffering an offense, and felt that the ransom could well be offered to Satan but never to the Father.

He Maurice may have dwelt too exclusively on the idea of sacrifice which is suggested in Hebrews Either Hort deceived the Bishop or the Bishop himself was also heretical concerning the Atonement. What I fear is that Mr. Bishop Ely probably could not know the tremendous influence of Maurice on the thinking and theology of Hort. Throughout his life, Hort constantly referred to Maurice in the most glowing terms of adulation and praise.

Hort never seems to have lost his supreme confidence in Maurice. We find him as a young man submitting himself and his thinking to the verdict of Maurice on the most important doctrines. I mean the question whether any man will be hereafter punished with never ending torments, spiritual or physical. If Hort had not already rejected the full authority of the Scriptures he could have this vexing question settled by referring to the Bible; rather than to a man who was to be dismissed from his position for heretical views on that very question.

The words are clear. The result was that he wrote to Maurice a long letter on Eternal Punishment and Redemption In each case the answer would prove fatal.

Real Bible study with the leading of the Holy Sprit should never produce depression or confusion. One might suggest, from the moment that he ceased to believe the evangelical fundamental doctrines of Scripture.

He remained always a grateful and loyal member of the secret club He was mainly responsible for the wording of the eestcott that binds the members to a conspiracy of silence.

Author: admin